TAMIL NADU DOCUMENT WRITERS ASSOCIATION REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY AND ORS. Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, COMMERCIAL TAXES AND RELIGIOUS ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE common question to be considered in these petitions is whether the amendment, of Rule 6 of the Tamil Nadu Copy Writers Licence Rules, 1971, introduced by G.O. Ms. No.603, Commercial Taxes and Religious Endowments Department, dated 4.8.1989 is valid.

(2.) UNDER Section 52 of the Indian Registration Act as amended by Tamil Nadu Act 21 of 1966, where any document of a specific class is admitted to registration, a true copy thereof shall, without unnecessary delay, be filed in the appropriate book according, to the order of its admission. Sub -section (3) of the said Section authorises the State Government to specify from time to time by rules the classes of documents in respect of which true copies shall be filed in the appropriate book as aforesaid. Under Sub -section (4), a true copy shall be neatly handwritten, printed, typewritten, lithographed or otherwise prepared in accordance with such rules as may be made in that behalf. By the same Act 21 of 1966, Section 89 -A was introduced in the main Act by virtue of which, the State Government was empowered to make rules for all purposes connected with the filing of true copies of documents in the appropriate books under the Act. Under Sub -section (2) of the said Section, such rules could provide for (a) the furnishing of true copies of documents by the person presenting the document for registration, (b) the manner in which true copies of -documents shall be prepared; and (c) the manner of filing of such copies. Exercising the powers conferred by Section 52(4) and Section 89 -A (2) of the said Act, the State Government made the Tamil Nadu Copy Writers Licence Rules, 1971, under G.O. Ms. No. 955, Revenue, dated 2nd April, 1971. The rules were made inapplicable to printed or typewritten copies. By G.O. Ms. No. 5093, Revenue, dated 20th September, 1973, lithographed copies were also excluded from the purview of the Rules. By G.O. Ms. No. 603 dated 4.8.1989, which is impugned in these petitions, the Rules are made applicable to typewritten copies, thus requiring the persons who type the copies of the documents for the purpose of filing in appropriate book as per Section 52 of the Act, to obtain licences as per the Rules. Under Rule 6, as it stood before amendment, no person was eligible for a licence unless he had passed the tests prescribed in Rule 8. Rule 8 enjoins the Inspector General to conduct, as often as he considers necessary, a test of two hours duration for licencing individuals as copy writers at the Headquarters of every Registration District, after calling for applications for admission to the least at least a month in advance by means of notice published in the notice board of all the registration office and such test shall be for good hand -writing, accuracy in transcription and the mode of preparation of copies. After amendment by the present G.O. Rule 6 reads as follows:

(3.) THE petitioners herein are aggrieved by the prescription of the said qualification under Rule 6. According to them, the rule prescribes unethical qualification and this violates the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. It is also their case that there is a violation of the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. Yet another contention which is half -heartedly raised is that the rules are beyond the scope of the Indian Registration Act and thus ab initio void.